I would need to see a picture of the stop sign from a driver's perspective before making a judgement about this.

I Wear Pants;887767 wrote:Shoot. Them. All.

Or we could cut their heads off and place them on the pole that contained the stop sign that they covered.

thavoice;887398 wrote:Eh, it was just a prank. I think they should get some sort of time, but to be served after the football season.

I don't understand your logic. Pranks are premeditated. There is always an expected end result. So explain to me what these two thought the outcome of covering a stop sign would be? It doesn't take a genius to understand at the age of 18 covering a stop sign has literally no good end result.

Y-Town Steelhound;888056 wrote:So am I going to have to be the asshole who says that these 18 and 19 year olds shouldn't have their lives ruined considering the victims were probably not hanging around too much longer (80 and 85 year olds, probably shouldn't have been driving in the first place). I know it sounds cruel but it's also reality.

LOL, so now we can prioritize whose lives are more important. Gotcha.

I'm gonna venture to guess that the 80 and 85 year olds lived a much more productive life than these "pranksters" will.

bradmaynard;888604 wrote:I don't understand your logic. Pranks are premeditated. There is always an expected end result. So explain to me what these two thought the outcome of covering a stop sign would be? It doesn't take a genius to understand at the age of 18 covering a stop sign has literally no good end result.

I believe thavoice was referring to an incident that happened several years ago where two kids put fake deer in the road and it caused an accident. The judge ruled they would be punished...but not until after their football season. His response seemed facetious to me...which was why I agreed.

bradmaynard;888604 wrote:I don't understand your logic. Pranks are premeditated. There is always an expected end result. So explain to me what these two thought the outcome of covering a stop sign would be? It doesn't take a genius to understand at the age of 18 covering a stop sign has literally no good end result.

18 year olds are also dumb enough to bong 4 Lokos. You think they think about THAT end result?

not to anyone in particular....but if you were the judge what would your senetence be?

Gblock;888706 wrote:not to anyone in particular....but if you were the judge what would your senetence be?

Please don't make Belly type the sentence.

Jughead;888599 wrote:Or we could cut their heads off and place them on the pole that contained the stop sign that they covered.

We can cut their heads off after we shoot them. This is a good compromise no?

Gblock;888706 wrote:not to anyone in particular....but if you were the judge what would your senetence be?

Force them to watch every Bengals, Clippers(NBA), and Royals game for the rest of their life.

Hb31187;888404 wrote:Yeah its not exactly impossible to tell that theres a stop sign there still. Stupid prank, but competent drivers under 80, 95/100 wouldnt have a hard time telling thats still a stop sign.

I wonder what it looked like when they were approaching it? In that pic, from that angle I can still tell that's a stop sign.

i wonder if they two victims were jewish? it was on Huber-Hitler Road...

I always find the comment section of news articles about things like this entertaining......or mind-numbing. Love the inevitable, "it is enough that they have to live with this for the rest of their lives" and "I suppose none of you have made a mistake".

I'm all for acting like a fucktard. But when you do that and kill someone, you have to expect a nice little prison rape is coming your way.

Y-Town Steelhound;888056 wrote:So am I going to have to be the **** who says that these 18 and 19 year olds shouldn't have their lives ruined considering the victims were probably not hanging around too much longer (80 and 85 year olds, probably shouldn't have been driving in the first place). I know it sounds cruel but it's also reality.

Lol. Sorry I killed your grandma, dude. But you know, she was so goddam old anyway.

Rotinaj;888732 wrote:Force them to watch every Bengals, Clippers(NBA), and Royals game for the rest of their life.

Three words.

CRUEL
AND
UNUSUAL

No judge would ever do something so vile to even the worst criminal.

enigmaax;888784 wrote:Lol. Sorry I killed your grandma, dude. But you know, she was so goddam old anyway.

Don't try to compare apples to oranges. If you directly killed my grandma then that's one thing, but what these kids did wasn't exactly pre-meditated. I guess I have two points here. 1. Would the people in the car have died if they had been 45 instead of 85? Chances are that age factored into the ladies not being able to see the stop sign and not being able to avoid crashing. 2. Do these kids who have a full life ahead of them deserve to have it ruined because of a stupid mistake?

Obviously I'm not absolving these guys of blame as it is incredibly stupid to cover up a stop sign. But to pretend the age of these women played no part in their death is just being unrealistic.

Y-Town Steelhound;888952 wrote:Don't try to compare apples to oranges. If you directly killed my grandma then that's one thing, but what these kids did wasn't exactly pre-meditated. I guess I have two points here. 1. Would the people in the car have died if they had been 45 instead of 85? Chances are that age factored into the ladies not being able to see the stop sign and not being able to avoid crashing. 2. Do these kids who have a full life ahead of them deserve to have it ruined because of a stupid mistake?

1. I don't know and neither do you. While the drivers at the top and bottom end of the age scale are statistically the worst drivers, one seeking justice cannot assume that because the driver in question is old, that they must have been at least somewhat negligent. Again, a 16 year-old is statistically in the same ballpark as someone 85 in terms of driving safely. Had it been a 16 year-old driving, would you be asking the same question?

2. Ruined life? No. A decade or so in prison, you bet.

Y-Town Steelhound;888952 wrote:Don't try to compare apples to oranges. If you directly killed my grandma then that's one thing, but what these kids did wasn't exactly pre-meditated. I guess I have two points here. 1. Would the people in the car have died if they had been 45 instead of 85? Chances are that age factored into the ladies not being able to see the stop sign and not being able to avoid crashing. 2. Do these kids who have a full life ahead of them deserve to have it ruined because of a stupid mistake?

1. I don't know and neither do you. While the drivers at the top and bottom end of the age scale are statistically the worst drivers, one seeking justice cannot assume that because the driver in question is old, that they must have been at least somewhat negligent.

2. Ruined life? No. Several years in prison, you bet.

Y-Town Steelhound;888952 wrote:Don't try to compare apples to oranges. If you directly killed my grandma then that's one thing, but what these kids did wasn't exactly pre-meditated. I guess I have two points here. 1. Would the people in the car have died if they had been 45 instead of 85? Chances are that age factored into the ladies not being able to see the stop sign and not being able to avoid crashing. 2. Do these kids who have a full life ahead of them deserve to have it ruined because of a stupid mistake?

Obviously I'm not absolving these guys of blame as it is incredibly stupid to cover up a stop sign. But to pretend the age of these women played no part in their death is just being unrealistic.

Man, now this is really reminding me about that other incident mentioned in this thread about the fake deer in the road and the punishment to be served after football.

Since a certain percentage of people in that community tended to ignore details such as how the two young men victimized by the "prank" of putting fake deer in the road suffered severe injuries and tried to put the blame on them for it happening because of the victims speeding and allegedly being less than sober. Essentially creating a "if it was a real deer, it'd all be on them for driving unsafely and under the influence" defense while ignoring that it wasn't a real deer and was a completely man-made incident.

Y-Town Steelhound;888952 wrote:Don't try to compare apples to oranges. If you directly killed my grandma then that's one thing, but what these kids did wasn't exactly pre-meditated.

I'm not saying they should be charged with murder either. I'm fine with whatever fits by law. But whether it was pre-meditated or not, I think you are underestimating the level of intelligence it would take to understand that if a car goes blindly through a stop sign into the path of another car, there's an extraordinary risk of it turning out to be much more than a harmless prank. I can't tell from the picture, but does anyone know the speed limit of the cross traffic? If I stop and think about doing this, I can't think of a single outcome that is a) funny or b) doesn't involve some type of serious damage to someone else's either property or physical condition.

I guess I have two points here. 1. Would the people in the car have died if they had been 45 instead of 85? Chances are that age factored into the ladies not being able to see the stop sign and not being able to avoid crashing. 2. Do these kids who have a full life ahead of them deserve to have it ruined because of a stupid mistake?

1. Does not matter at all. It is ridiculous to even begin to place the blame on the driver, her age, or anything else.
2. Those are the risks you take when you do something that can so obviously get someone killed. Did the women who died, regardless of their age deserve to be victims? Do any children or grandchildren deserve to be without their grandmas right now, at this moment? Does the driver of the truck deserve whatever psychological damage comes with being a part of the accident? Life is a pretty simple process - you enjoy a lot of freedom to make your own choices until those choices hurt someone else.

I'm interested in what punishment you feel is appropriate. If you think doing some jail time is "ruining" their lives, then yes, they absolutely deserve it. I don't expect life in prison or anything, but I wouldn't cry for them if they got the maximum allowable.

Obviously I'm not absolving these guys of blame as it is incredibly stupid to cover up a stop sign. But to pretend the age of these women played no part in their death is just being unrealistic.

Misappropriating any of the blame is wrong. Chances are they'd be alive right now if the stop sign was clearly visible. That is really the only speculation that matters.

ernest_t_bass;888688 wrote:18 year olds are also dumb enough to bong 4 Lokos. You think they think about THAT end result?

A solid buzz and a little bit of a twitch and then a ride home from one of your friends? Maybe puke in your parents toilet depending on what you ate prior to bonging it? I don't see the parallels here.

Gblock;888706 wrote:not to anyone in particular....but if you were the judge what would your senetence be?

I think tampering with a traffic control device is a misdemeanor, so by the 3 minutes of research I just did (and I could be wrong) the involuntary manslaughter would be a 3rd degree felony.

I don't know about all of the sentencing provisions, but a table I found showed this for 3rd degree felonies:

Third Degree

one, two, three, four, or five years.

$10,000

If neither of them has a criminal history, I wouldn't consider them likely to be repeat offenders and I'd say 18-24 months would be appropriate.

Mulva;889100 wrote:I think tampering with a traffic control device is a misdemeanor, so by the 3 minutes of research I just did (and I could be wrong) the involuntary manslaughter would be a 3rd degree felony.

I don't know about all of the sentencing provisions, but a table I found showed this for 3rd degree felonies:

Third Degree

one, two, three, four, or five years.

$10,000

If neither of them has a criminal history, I wouldn't consider them likely to be repeat offenders and I'd say 18-24 months would be appropriate.

I would say based on your research, two consecutive maximum terms would not be at all out of line.

What if somebody, as a prank, replaced the water in a bottle of water with acid? Would it just be a prank or premeditated murder?

I guess the point comes down to the 'prank defense' is what exactly were the 'kids (and I use that loosely)' thought would happen when they covered the stop signs? That everyone would continue to stop as normal to prove that stop signs aren't needed? Or to sit back and watch people run the stop sign into traffic that isn't stopping? And what were they hoping the outcome would be? More than likely they were hoping for some crashes because that would be 'cool' for them to see.

Just because they didn't intend for it to go that far (because they're idiots) doesn't mean their actions didn't directly cause someone else's death. Manslaughter at worst, premeditated murder at best.

Either way, they're looking at, and deserve some serious punishment. A slap on the wrist would imply that these 'pranks' (according to them) are acceptable and can be done again with little repercussions.

Sykotyk

Fab4Runner;887425 wrote:My thoughts exactly.

Lol Kenton, bunch of dumbasses.